DOCSLIB.ORG

September 24, 2018 Office of Information Programs and Services A/GIS/IPS/RL U. S. Department of State Washington, D. C. 20522-02

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
September 24, 2018 Office of Information Programs and Services A/GIS/IPS/RL U. S. Department of State Washington, D. C. 20522-02 September 24, 2018 Office of Information Programs and Services A/GIS/IPS/RL U. S. Department of State Washington, D. C. 20522-0208 Fax: (202) 261-8579 Melissa Golden Lead Paralegal and FOIA Specialist Department of Justice Room 5511, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. National Office Washington, DC 20530-0001 125 Broad Street, Phone: (202) 514-2053 18th Floor Email: [email protected] New York, NY 10004 Tel: (212) 549-2644 Fax: (212) 549-2644 aclu.org Re: Request Under Freedom of Information Act (Expedited Processing & Fee Waiver/Limitation Requested) Susan N. Herman President To Whom It May Concern: Anthony D. Romero Executive Director The American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil 1 Richard Zacks Liberties Union Foundation (together, the “ACLU”) submit this Treasurer Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request (the “Request”) for records pertaining to the United States’ newly announced policy regarding the International Criminal Court (“ICC”). I. Background On September 10, 2018, the U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton gave a speech at the Federalist Society in which he labeled the ICC as “illegitimate”, “unchecked”, and “dangerous.” 2 He further 1 The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation is a 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3) organization that provides legal representation free of charge to individuals and organizations in civil rights and civil liberties cases, educates the public about civil rights and civil liberties issues across the country, directly lobbies legislators, and mobilizes the American Civil Liberties Union’s members to lobby their legislators. The American Civil Liberties Union is a separate non-profit, 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(4) membership organization that educates the public about the civil liberties implications of pending and proposed state and federal legislation, provides analysis of pending and proposed legislation, directly lobbies legislators, and mobilizes its members to lobby their legislators. 2 See “Full Text of John Bolton’s speech to the Federalist Society.” AL JAZEERA, Sept. 10 2018, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/09/full-text-john-bolton-speech- federalist-society-180910172828633.html. stated that the United States will not join, assist, or cooperate with the ICC because it continues to be a “free-wheeling global organization claiming jurisdiction over individuals without their consent” and is “antithetical to [the United States’] ideals.” Mr. Bolton even went so far as to describe the ICC as “the founders’ worst nightmare come to life: an elegant office building in a faraway country that determines the guilt or innocence of American citizens.”3 Furthermore, Mr. Bolton detailed the United States’ intentions to sanction the ICC and its staff if they open an investigation into allegations of torture committed by U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Mr. Bolton said the Trump Administration “…will respond against the ICC and its personnel to the extent permitted by US law. We will ban its judges and prosecutors from entering the United States. We will sanction their funds in the US financial system, and we will prosecute them in the US criminal system. We will do the same for any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans.”4 This represents a drastic shift in U.S. policy towards the ICC. While the U.S. is not a member of the court, it has supported the court’s efforts to hold perpetrators of war crimes accountable when it has been in the best interests of the United States and its allies.5 Bolton’s policy speech raises serious concerns about the United States’ engagement with international war crimes tribunals and its commitment to fighting impunity for mass atrocities.6 The Trump administration’s new policy has the potential of isolating the United States from its closest democratic allies; Turkey and the United States are currently the only nations in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) that are not members of the ICC.7 In response to Mr. Bolton’s policy speech, several countries and key international bodies spoke out in defense of the ICC’s mandate. The 3 See Id. 4 See Id. 5 Alex Whiting, Why John Bolton vs. Int’l Criminal Court is Different from Version 1.0, JUST SECURITY, Sept. 10, 2018, https://www.justsecurity.org/60680/international- criminal-court-john-bolton-afghanistan-torture. 6 Gardiner Harris, Trump Administration Withdraws U.S. From U.N. Human Rights Council, The NEW YORK TIMES, Jun. 19, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/19/us/politics/trump-israel-palestinians-human- rights.html. 7 Alex Whiting, Why John Bolton vs. Int’l Criminal Court is Different from Version 1.0, JUST SECURITY, Sept. 10, 2018, https://www.justsecurity.org/60680/international- criminal-court-john-bolton-afghanistan-torture. 2 French Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed the nation’s unwavering cooperation with the court, 8 while Germany’s Foreign Office tweeted their ongoing commitment to the ICC.9 The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, stated that the European Union “will continue to fully and strongly support the ICC and its work.”10 Furthermore, the President of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute, O-Gon Kwon, released a statement on September 11 that both reaffirmed the Assembly of States Parties’ support of the ICC, and emphasized the important role of the ICC in the international legal system: “The Court’s mandate is to help put an end to impunity for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole and to bring justice to those affected by such crimes. The Assembly of States Parties remains committed to uphold and defend the principles and values enshrined in the Rome Statute, including in particular the judicial independence of the Court.”11 In his speech, Mr. Bolton suggested that the court may claim universal jurisdiction and investigate and prosecute “acts of aggression” by the United States, warning that the term could be used to cover many U.S. military and intelligence operations overseas.12 These sentiments run contrary to the fact that the court lacks jurisdiction over the “crime of aggression” by non-members—and even members must specifically agree to such jurisdiction. 8 After Trump threats, France stands by International Criminal Court, REUTERS, Sept. 11, 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-icc-france/after-trump- threats-france-stands-by-international-criminal-court- idUSKCN1LR1QW?utm_source=reddit.com. 9 See @GermanyDiplo. “Since 2002, the International Criminal Court @IntlCrimCourt has been enforcing international law in cases of the most serious crimes. We are committed to the work of the ICC - in particular when it comes under fire.” Twitter, Sept. 11, 2018, 10:50 a.m., https://twitter.com/GermanyDiplo/status/1039526566089371648. 10 EU Back ICC After US Questions Court’s Legitimacy, ASSOCIATED PRESS, Sept. 13, 2018, https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2018-09-13/eu-backs-icc- after-us-questions-courts-legitimacy. 11 See “Statement by the President of the Assembly, O-Gon Kwon, reaffirming support for the ICC.” Sept. 11, 2018, https://asp.icc- cpi.int/en_menus/asp/press%20releases/Pages/PR1405.aspx. 12 See “Full Text of John Bolton’s speech to the Federalist Society,” AL JAZEERA, Sept. 10 2018, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/09/full-text-john-bolton-speech- federalist-society-180910172828633.html. 3 As exemplified in remarks during the September 11 State Department daily briefing,13 it is unclear to the American public what legal authority the Trump administration has to sanction and prosecute ICC judges and prosecutors, as well as any other company or states that will assist the ICC in its investigations.14 To provide the American public with information about the Trump administration’s positions concerning the United States’ working relationships with international justice and human rights bodies— information that is crucial to the public given the United States’ historic involvement with and support for international war crime tribunals and organizations—the ACLU seeks such information through this FOIA request. II. Requested Records The ACLU seeks the following records created on or between January 20, 2017, to the present: (1) Any communication concerning the U.S. government’s new policy15 towards the International Criminal Court as described in National Security Advisor Bolton’s speech on September 10, 2018; (2) Any legal and policy memoranda concerning the U.S. government’s threat to ban ICC judges and prosecutors from entering the United States, to sanction their funds in the U.S. financial system, and to prosecute them in the U.S. criminal system; and (3) Any legal and policy memoranda concerning the U.S. government’s threat to sanction any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans. For the purposes of this Request, “communication” is collectively defined to include, but is not limited to: talking points, 13 See “Department Press Briefing – September 11, 2018.” Sept. 11, 2018, https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2018/09/285807.htm. 14 Marty Lederman, Does Trump Have Legal Authority to Follow Through on John Bolton’s Threats to the Int’l Criminal Court?, JUST SECURITY, Sept. 20, 2018, https://www.justsecurity.org/60705/explains-boltons-threats-icc. 15 For the purposes of this Request “new policy” refers to the U.S. government’s intent to inflict travel and financial sanctions on the International Criminal Court and the implications of such actions on future cooperation with the International Criminal Court’s judges and prosecutors, as well as any other company or state that will assist the International Criminal Court’s investigations into U.S. torture allegations in Afghanistan. 4 intelligence notes, assessments, bulletins, instructions, directives, guidance documents, formal and informal presentations, training documents, alerts, updates, advisories, reports, contracts or agreements, minutes or notes of meetings and phone calls, other memoranda, legal opinions, evaluations, memorializations, guidelines, emails, and social media posts.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Periodicalspov.Pdf
    “Consider the Source” A Resource Guide to Liberal, Conservative and Nonpartisan Periodicals 30 East Lake Street ∙ Chicago, IL 60601 HWC Library – Room 501 312.553.5760 ver heard the saying “consider the source” in response to something that was questioned? Well, the same advice applies to what you read – consider the source. When conducting research, bear in mind that periodicals (journals, magazines, newspapers) may have varying points-of-view, biases, and/or E political leanings. Here are some questions to ask when considering using a periodical source: Is there a bias in the publication or is it non-partisan? Who is the sponsor (publisher or benefactor) of the publication? What is the agenda of the sponsor – to simply share information or to influence social or political change? Some publications have specific political perspectives and outright state what they are, as in Dissent Magazine (self-described as “a magazine of the left”) or National Review’s boost of, “we give you the right view and back it up.” Still, there are other publications that do not clearly state their political leanings; but over time have been deemed as left- or right-leaning based on such factors as the points- of-view of their opinion columnists, the make-up of their editorial staff, and/or their endorsements of politicians. Many newspapers fall into this rather opaque category. A good rule of thumb to use in determining whether a publication is liberal or conservative has been provided by Media Research Center’s L. Brent Bozell III: “if the paper never met a conservative cause it didn’t like, it’s conservative, and if it never met a liberal cause it didn’t like, it’s liberal.” Outlined in the following pages is an annotated listing of publications that have been categorized as conservative, liberal, non-partisan and religious.
    [Show full text]
  • Dissident Knowledge in Higher Education
    Advance Praise for Dissident Knowledge in Higher Education “The space for dissent and real democratic debate is quickly shrinking both in public life and academic institutions in western democracies. Today, the cries of ‘fake news’ make the loudest (though rarely the best informed) voices the site of authority and truth. This volume helps readers in higher education ask critical and conscious questions about what it means to con- tend for truth. It is an important and significant read for those who want the intellectual space to remain a terrain for thinkers.” —Gloria Ladson-Billings, author of The Dreamkeepers “This deep and layered book maps the path toward a university based on eth- ics and justice rather than corporate needs and military standards. It reaches anyone who wants to understand the social, political, and economic trends that define our times. It is an outstanding contribution to the scholarship on higher education.” —William Ayers, author of Teaching with Conscience in an Imperfect World “Dissident Knowledge in Higher Education is a rich and multi-layered examina- tion of the impact of corporatization on our universities, as well as how they can be reclaimed. Highly recommended.” —James Turk, editor of Academic Freedom in Conflict dissident knowledge in higher education edited with an introduction by marc spooner & James MCNinch © 2018 University of Regina Press “An Interview with Noam Chomsky” © 2016 Noam Chomsky, Marc Spooner, and James McNinch This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommerical- NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. See www.creativecommons.org. The text may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes, provided that credit is given to the original author.
    [Show full text]
  • WHY COMPETITION in the POLITICS INDUSTRY IS FAILING AMERICA a Strategy for Reinvigorating Our Democracy
    SEPTEMBER 2017 WHY COMPETITION IN THE POLITICS INDUSTRY IS FAILING AMERICA A strategy for reinvigorating our democracy Katherine M. Gehl and Michael E. Porter ABOUT THE AUTHORS Katherine M. Gehl, a business leader and former CEO with experience in government, began, in the last decade, to participate actively in politics—first in traditional partisan politics. As she deepened her understanding of how politics actually worked—and didn’t work—for the public interest, she realized that even the best candidates and elected officials were severely limited by a dysfunctional system, and that the political system was the single greatest challenge facing our country. She turned her focus to political system reform and innovation and has made this her mission. Michael E. Porter, an expert on competition and strategy in industries and nations, encountered politics in trying to advise governments and advocate sensible and proven reforms. As co-chair of the multiyear, non-partisan U.S. Competitiveness Project at Harvard Business School over the past five years, it became clear to him that the political system was actually the major constraint in America’s inability to restore economic prosperity and address many of the other problems our nation faces. Working with Katherine to understand the root causes of the failure of political competition, and what to do about it, has become an obsession. DISCLOSURE This work was funded by Harvard Business School, including the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness and the Division of Research and Faculty Development. No external funding was received. Katherine and Michael are both involved in supporting the work they advocate in this report.
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey of Groups, Individuals, Strategies and Prospects the Russia Studies Centre at the Henry Jackson Society
    The Russian Opposition: A Survey of Groups, Individuals, Strategies and Prospects The Russia Studies Centre at the Henry Jackson Society By Julia Pettengill Foreword by Chris Bryant MP 1 First published in 2012 by The Henry Jackson Society The Henry Jackson Society 8th Floor – Parker Tower, 43-49 Parker Street, London, WC2B 5PS Tel: 020 7340 4520 www.henryjacksonsociety.org © The Henry Jackson Society, 2012 All rights reserved The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and are not necessarily indicative of those of The Henry Jackson Society or its directors Designed by Genium, www.geniumcreative.com ISBN 978-1-909035-01-0 2 About The Henry Jackson Society The Henry Jackson Society: A cross-partisan, British think-tank. Our founders and supporters are united by a common interest in fostering a strong British, European and American commitment towards freedom, liberty, constitutional democracy, human rights, governmental and institutional reform and a robust foreign, security and defence policy and transatlantic alliance. The Henry Jackson Society is a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales under company number 07465741 and a charity registered in England and Wales under registered charity number 1140489. For more information about Henry Jackson Society activities, our research programme and public events please see www.henryjacksonsociety.org. 3 CONTENTS Foreword by Chris Bryant MP 5 About the Author 6 About the Russia Studies Centre 6 Acknowledgements 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 INTRODUCTION 11 CHAPTER
    [Show full text]
  • Neoconservatism Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative Hberkc Ch5 Mp 104 Rev1 Page 104 Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative Hberkc Ch5 Mp 105 Rev1 Page 105
    Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_103 rev1 page 103 part iii Neoconservatism Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_104 rev1 page 104 Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_105 rev1 page 105 chapter five The Neoconservative Journey Jacob Heilbrunn The Neoconservative Conspiracy The longer the United States struggles to impose order in postwar Iraq, the harsher indictments of the George W. Bush administration’s foreign policy are becoming. “Acquiring additional burdens by engag- ing in new wars of liberation is the last thing the United States needs,” declared one Bush critic in Foreign Affairs. “The principal problem is the mistaken belief that democracy is a talisman for all the world’s ills, and that the United States has a responsibility to promote dem- ocratic government wherever in the world it is lacking.”1 Does this sound like a Democratic pundit bashing Bush for par- tisan gain? Quite the contrary. The swipe came from Dimitri Simes, president of the Nixon Center and copublisher of National Interest. Simes is not alone in calling on the administration to reclaim the party’s pre-Reagan heritage—to abandon the moralistic, Wilsonian, neoconservative dream of exporting democracy and return to a more limited and realistic foreign policy that avoids the pitfalls of Iraq. 1. Dimitri K. Simes, “America’s Imperial Dilemma,” Foreign Affairs (Novem- ber/December 2003): 97, 100. Hoover Press : Berkowitz/Conservative hberkc ch5 Mp_106 rev1 page 106 106 jacob heilbrunn In fact, critics on the Left and Right are remarkably united in their assessment of the administration. Both believe a neoconservative cabal has hijacked the administration’s foreign policy and has now overplayed its hand.
    [Show full text]
  • Globalizing Public Interest Law
    UCLA UCLA Public Law & Legal Theory Series Title Globalizing Public Interest Law Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6qt7s0jv Authors Cummings, Scott L Trubek, Louise G Publication Date 2009-02-02 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California CUMMINGSTRUBEK_FORMATTED_020509(2)_FINAL TO PRINTER 042009.DOC 4/28/2009 11:36 AM CummingsTrubek_Formatted_020509(2)_final to printer 042009.doc Globalizing Public Interest Law GLOBALIZING PUBLIC INTEREST LAW Scott L. Cummings∗ and Louise G. Trubek† This essay examines the structural factors shaping the globalization of pub- lic interest law in the post-Cold War era and offers a preliminary appraisal of its emerging global role. Part I traces public interest law’s shift from an insular American project toward a more globalized set of practices, suggest- ing two reasons for this change. First, the ascendance of the Rule of Law movement has promoted public interest law in developing and transitional countries as a crucial component of good governance. Second, the increas- ing power of international institutions has drawn public interest lawyers into global advocacy arenas to challenge the deregulation of global markets and leverage the human rights system to advance social justice movements. Part II explores the implications of public interest law’s emergence as a global institution and a tool of global governance. It outlines the factors shaping public interest law’s institutional design, which incorporates elements im- ported by global sponsors, while building upon unique national- and re- gional-level opportunities. This essay concludes by offering a provisional map of public interest law’s evolving role in global governance, highlighting the global arenas in which it operates, the strategies it deploys, and the net- works it helps to construct.
    [Show full text]
  • Motion to Dismiss and in Opposition to the United States’ Emergency Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Motion for Preliminary Injunction
    Case 1:20-cv-01580-RCL Document 9 Filed 06/18/20 Page 1 of 54 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 20-1580-RCL v. JOHN R. BOLTON, Defendant. DEFENDANT’S COMBINED MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO DISMISS AND IN OPPOSITION TO THE UNITED STATES’ EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION June 18, 2020 Charles J. Cooper, Bar No. 248070 Michael W. Kirk, Bar No. 424648 COOPER & KIRK, PLLC 1523 New Hampshire Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 220-9600 Facsimile: (202) 220-9601 Email: [email protected] Counsel for Defendant John R. Bolton Case 1:20-cv-01580-RCL Document 9 Filed 06/18/20 Page 2 of 54 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 STATEMENT ..................................................................................................................................4 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................20 MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER RULE 12(b)(6) ........................................................................20 OPPOSITION TO APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINTING ORDER AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ................................................................28
    [Show full text]
  • Origins of Conservative Political Thought Dr. Jeffrey Dixon
    POLI 5303: Origins of Conservative Political Thought Section 115 (Summer 2018) 6 PM – 8:30 PM Mon/Wed Founder’s Hall 213 Dr. Jeffrey Dixon Office: Founder’s Hall 217A Email: [email protected] Phone: (254) 501-5871 (email preferred) Office Hours: 5:00-5:45 PM Mon/Wed, 4:35- 5:45 PM Tues/Thurs, or by appointment Catalog Description This course covers the philosophical origins of conservative political thought, focusing on its traditional, statist, and libertarian variants. Course Overview This course critically examines the foundations of modern conservative thought. At least three variants of conservatism can be traced back hundreds (if not thousands) of years. Traditionalist conservatism, which seeks to preserve and in some cases restore the wisdom of the past and to resist modernizing influences, can be traced back at least as far as Aristotle. Realist (or statist) conservatism focuses on the maintenance of security – law and order at home and a hard line on international affairs – and can be traced back at least as far as Kautilya. During the Enlightenment, a new variant of conservatism emerged – libertarian conservatism, which traces its roots to John Locke. We will critically evaluate these strands of conservatism and compare them to other modern conservative philosophies, often termed “neoconservatism.” As a general rule, most of your out-of-class time devoted to this course should be spent reading the material and taking notes or writing questions about what you read. Philosophy isn’t casual reading material; you actually have to be engaged and careful as you work your way through the texts.
    [Show full text]
  • ROBERT NOVAK JOURNALISM FELLOWS Since Inception of the Program in 1994
    Update on the 141 ROBERT NOVAK JOURNALISM FELLOWS Since Inception of the Program in 1994 24th Annual Robert Novak Journalism Fellowship Awards Dinner May 10, 2017 2017 ROBERT NOVAK JOURNALISM FELLOWSHIP AWARD WINNERS HELEN R. ANDREWS | PART-TIME FELLOWSHIP Project: “Eminent Boomers: The Worst Generation from Birth to Decadence” Helen earned a degree in religious studies from Yale University, where she served as speaker of the Yale Political Union. Currently a freelance writer and commentator, she served for three years as a policy analyst for the Centre for Independent Studies, a leading conservative think tank in suburban Sydney, Australia. Previously, she was an associate editor at National Review. Her work has appeared in First Things, Claremont Review of Books, The American Spectator, The Weekly Standard and others. MADISON E. ISZLER | PART-TIME FELLOWSHIP Project: “What’s Killing Middle-Aged White Women—and What it Means for Society” Madison holds a master’s degree, cum laude, in political philosophy and economics from The King’s College. Currently, she is an Intercollegiate Studies Institute Reporting Fellow. She has interned for USA Today and the National Association of Scholars and was a reporter for the New York Post. Her work has appeared in numerous outlets, including the Raleigh News & Observer, Charlotte Observer, New York Post and Miami Herald. Originally from Florida, she resides in Raleigh, North Carolina. RYAN LOVELACE | PART-TIME FELLOWSHIP Project: “Hiding in Plain Sight: Criminal Illegal Immigration in America” An Illinois native, Ryan attended and played football for the University of Wyoming. He earned a Bachelor of Arts in journalism from Butler University.
    [Show full text]
  • Does Anti-Americanism Exist? Experimental Evidence from France
    Does Anti-Americanism Exist? Experimental Evidence from France Richard K. Herrmann∗ and Joshua D. Kertzery Last revised: May 30, 2015 Abstract: There are many debates in Washington about anti-Americanism: where it comes from, what implications it has for US foreign policy, and whether it can be eradicated by careful public diplomacy. Yet before we search for a cure for the disease or ascertain how severe its symptoms are, we need to be able to diagnose it in the first place. One reason why anti-Americanism attracts so much attention is that it is often understood as a form of prejudice rather than mere disagreement with American policies. If this is the case, however, we need to be able to differentiate unpopularity from the prejudice believed to be causing it. To do so, we present three novel experiments embedded in a national survey in France in 2009-10, studying anti-Americanism like how political scientists study other forms of prejudice. Our findings counter conventional wisdom in two ways. First, we find relatively little evidence of anti-Americanism in France. Second, a key predictor of anti-Americanism in France is nationalism, but not in the direction some IR scholars might expect: the more attached the French are to their country, the more of a break they give the United States compared to other great powers who behave similarly. The results thus suggest that nationalism and the fostering of a common ingroup are not contradictory forces. ∗Professor, Department of Political Science, The Ohio State University. 2140 Derby Hall, 154 N. Oval Mall, Columbus OH 43210.
    [Show full text]
  • Opportunity, Responsibility, and Security a Consensus Plan for Reducing Poverty and Restoring the American Dream
    OPPORTUNITY, RESPONSIBILITY, AND SECURITY A CONSENSUS PLAN FOR REDUCING POVERTY AND RESTORING THE AMERICAN DREAM AEI/Brookings Working Group on Poverty and Opportunity Members of the AEI/Brookings Working Group on Poverty and Opportunity LAWRENCE ABER, Willner Family Professor of Psychology and Public Policy, New York University STUART BUTLER, Senior Fellow in Economic Studies, Brookings Institution SHELDON DANZIGER, President, Russell Sage Foundation ROBERT DOAR, Morgridge Fellow in Poverty Studies, American Enterprise Institute DAVID T. ELLWOOD, Scott M. Black Professor of Political Economy, Harvard University JUDITH M. GUERON, President Emerita, MDRC JONATHAN HAIDT, Thomas Cooley Professor of Ethical Leadership, New York University RON HASKINS, Cabot Family Chair and Senior Fellow, Economic Studies, Brookings Institution HARRY J. HOLZER, Professor of Public Policy, Georgetown University KAY HYMOWITZ, William E. Simon Fellow, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research LAWRENCE MEAD, Professor of Politics and Public Policy, New York University RONALD MINCY, Maurice V. Russell Professor of Social Policy and Social Work Practice, Columbia University RICHARD V. REEVES, Senior Fellow in Economic Studies, Brookings Institution MICHAEL R. STRAIN, Deputy Director of Economic Policy Studies and Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute JANE WALDFOGEL, Compton Foundation Centennial Professor for the Prevention of Children and Youth Problems, Columbia University OPPORTUNITY, RESPONSIBILITY, AND SECURITY A CONSENSUS PLAN FOR REDUCING POVERTY AND RESTORING THE AMERICAN DREAM AEI/Brookings Working Group on Poverty and Opportunity © 2015 by the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research and the Brookings Institution. All rights reserved. The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) and the Brookings Institution are nonpartisan, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) educational organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Neo-Conservatism and Foreign Policy
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Master's Theses and Capstones Student Scholarship Fall 2009 Neo-conservatism and foreign policy Ted Boettner University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Boettner, Ted, "Neo-conservatism and foreign policy" (2009). Master's Theses and Capstones. 116. https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis/116 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses and Capstones by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Neo-Conservatism and Foreign Policy BY TED BOETTNER BS, West Virginia University, 2002 THESIS Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Political Science September, 2009 UMI Number: 1472051 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI" UMI Microform 1472051 Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
    [Show full text]